My pal picked up a new ecodiesel in Laramie trim with the air bags. Sure rides nice, nicer than my 2013 RAM 2500HD. He's on a trip to Alaska now and averaging 27 mpg unloaded. I averaged 18-20mpg on a trip to CA unloaded, but avg of 75mph. Mileage would have been better if I slowed down.

I'm still glad I bought the 3/4 ton. Payload is never a concern, nor is tongue weight, and I also haul dirt bikes. If I had the 23 or 25, I'd look real hard at the ecodiesel.

7380 - 6280 = 1,100 (16%; higher than the target of 12-13%; generally a higher TW [15%+] does add some stability, but usually at the expense of WD difficulties)

Load Transferred to TT Axles
when WD System in Activated = TT1 - TT2

140 (with 300# to FA; or, roughly 2:1 as is to be expected).

The GCW of this rig is the same as my parents '76 Cadillac pulling their '75 28' Silver Streak where the TT outweighed the TV by around 1k and with all five of us aboard . . . and at an usual 7-8 mpg at 55. My grandparents '67 Dodge pulling a '66 Streamline weighed less, but saw 10-mpg due mainly to the higher compression and better tuning for power in that pre-emissions-control era.

Boy, that TW sure is high, what's the story? More batteries and bigger propane tanks a start?

The WD numbers look nice in the main sense. No surprise, here. The other step is to have look at the tire loads individually. TV tire pressure is to the heaviest tire on an axle, not to the axle average (TT tire pressure is always to sidewall maximum).

I look to moving my toolboxes to get the best read in the above. Then comes the need to secure gear in the event of a rollover. I was waiting for it a few years back and then found the story . . young man survives crash but is killed by flying IPod (years before it was a flying cellphone and for decades previous the contents of a womans purse). In other words whatever we can do to keep gear in place and doors, etc, closed in the TT is worth the trouble and I needn't go further in re with the truck cab or bed.

Brake drag on both vehicles as well as alignment ought to be verified (a vehicle being new is only a coincidence to this need) and trailer bearing pre-set also verified for FE [fuel economy] purposes. The best TT brake controller is also indicated for highest FE (and a VPP hitch to round things off).

And, by the way, you are choosing to give up mpg by not using cruise control. The days of outsmarting it are prettty well gone outside of the hilliest terrain. The usual safety caveats apply, but one has to work tremendously hard to outguess the software. This mental effort outweighs being alert to road, load, traffic and weather and is thus counterproductive. Change the travel set speed IOW. This is a given for CUMMINS or KENWORTH (white papers on fuel economy online).

The cc programming for your little truck deserves a chance. Use the dash mpg read over a 100-mile distance and compare to the cc for another hundred whle on the Interstate. MPG is all about the tenths and hundredths adding up over thousands of miles . . and they do.

Smarter use of onboard diagnostics also indicates use of engine run time as well as average trip speed. Percentage of idle time for a trip. These can all be used quite well to further fine-tune a trip plan where the first day or three is about making distances versus sight-seeing. The conditions under which I work are different, but we are both running the roads. Understanding through experimentation is all about best fit to conditions and not forcing wants on what is encountered.

7380 - 6280 = 1,100 (16%; higher than the target of 12-13%; generally a higher TW [15%+] does add some stability, but usually at the expense of WD difficulties)

Boy, that TW sure is high, what's the story? More batteries and bigger propane tanks a start?

I always knew the TW was a lot, I didn't think it would be over 1,000.

On this trailer the fresh water tank is forward of the axles and it holds 50 gallons, so having the fresh tank full adds a good bit to the tongue weight. I had just filled both 30lb propane bottles. The pantry and refer (packed with food for a week) are both forward of the axles along with the galley with a good amount of pots and pans. I don't carry anything under the gaucho up front. I guess a few things need to be moved to the under bed storage bins.
It has just the one rear mounted battery.

Well, reducing the TW by a couple of hundred pounds seems like a good idea more I'd guess from A-frame integrity versus pure WDH numbers as the TV is fine for the given loading of same. I'm not up on that issue as I would be if I owned an A/S.

I wouldn't ever choose to travel without full fresh water. I'd rather move some kitchen gear to the area just aft of the rear axles -- close as possible -- but not until I saw the individual tire weight readings. There may indeed be room given a heavier load on the front TT tires at present than the rear, so the move of gear seems obvious if the numbers prove out. This might be one time where carrying cast iron dutch ovens, etc, is the better part of the permanent loading.

As a 16% TW is no big deal past TV payload capacity my concern would be in making TT tire load numbers fore & aft as well side-to-side as equal as is reasonable. If that results in a lower TW, then, nice.

Now, for the record,

Keeping the load centered on the TT axles is the genuine concern; directly over and within about two feet feet fore & aft otherwise, with preference to the front as a general rule. The problem of I/S TT's is their need to not only ride level, but to also have nearly-equal tire loadings for best performance. The shortcomings of a conventionally-suspended trailer don't overcome their inherent instability vis-a-vis a suspension design whch is more forgiving of improper loading.

So far as FE is concerned best loading is conducive to fewer steering inputs to remain lane-centered and upright. Lane-centeredness is the key. The best mechancial baseline -- numbers to which I can refer -- is the start of a mpg quest. As I see diesel prices of $3.60/gl lately, 14.5-mpg is close enough to my 25-cpm while towing. My son is the Marine, so what is "Army Strong" in this case where the USMC rig is far longer and heavier and older, eh?

So, I'd say that if tire loading can be improved it may be that both TW and steering corrections per 100-miles come down. And, for a truck not yet broken in and outstanding MPG numbers for a back road, this rig is on it's way up even before the driver is fully used to it. We gotta spot Army something.

So, the first trip is in the books. Thanks to all of you for your kind words.
Overall, I am very, very happy with this truck. It did take me a long time reading and researching to make the decision to buy this truck. Hopefully all goes well with durability and longevity.
Trip stats-
610.2 miles
42.114 gallons
14.5 MPG (hand calculated)
The roads traveled were two lane US and state highways. I travelled at 65 MPH most of the time. I did pass someone on the way down and had plenty of passing power. I was going 85 when I let off. I wouldn't think of attempting a pass on a two lane highway with the Sequoia. The terrain was mostly flat coastal plains with a few hills between Cameron and Sealy on TX 36.
Steady state towing showed-
Water temp 215-220F
Trans temp 195-200F
Oil temp 230-235
I was in tow/Haul mode.
Most of the time it would stay in 7th gear, but occasionally it would shift to 8th.
I tried the cruise control on the way home and didn't like how it seemed to stay in 6th gear, so I shut it off. I never use cruise control, I just wanted to see how it worked on this truck.
On the way out, we went by the CAT scales to check loading and hitch rigging. These weights are fully loaded for a week of camping, three adults and one old furry feline, full 50 gallons of fresh water and two full 30# propane tanks.
Weighing one-WD appliedAttachment 218538
Weighing two-No WDAttachment 218539
Weighing three-no trailerAttachment 218540
I have good weight transfer with the old Reese Dual Cam and 750lb bars.
This combo tows so wonderfully I don't think I'll mess with it.
I was surprised to see that the calculated tongue (or is it reciever ) weight at 1,100lbs.

In summary, I don't think I could be happier with any other new truck.
It's working for me!

after reading your scale numbers we have about the same weights, please let me know what Resse p/n you have, it is hard to get anything from the sales guy's at etrailer. They insist we get the 1000bars....thank you

Flyingsilver,
I have the first generation Reese dual cam like is pictured in TomW's website.Tuning a Reese Hitch
It is not sold any longer. It works really well.
If you go to the Reese website, you can look up part numbers for things.
Find your hitch (round or trunnion) and select 800lb then click on replacement parts.

I always knew the TW was a lot, I didn't think it would be over 1,000.

On this trailer the fresh water tank is forward of the axles and it holds 50 gallons, so having the fresh tank full adds a good bit to the tongue weight. I had just filled both 30lb propane bottles. The pantry and refer (packed with food for a week) are both forward of the axles along with the galley with a good amount of pots and pans. I don't carry anything under the gaucho up front. I guess a few things need to be moved to the under bed storage bins.
It has just the one rear mounted battery.

I'll give the CC another try, maybe.

Thanks Ross

Hi all, I have some concerns about the wd of my tv, i have a Ram ecodiesel just like Russ, empty at the cat scale I got these numbers, steer axle 3420, drive axle, 3140, gross weight, 6560. Today we departed from Portland with a brand new intl signature, 28, 5968#with a tongue weight of 950, ẃ have the propane tanks full, and water tank full. The truck,? Two people and around 300lbs of cargo. On the way out of Portland we stoped at the cat scale and weighed the truck and trailer with the wd, we only had the chance to do one run at the scale as they were so busy with lots of trucks and our weight came to to 3620 steer axle, 6720 drive axle and 2720 trailer axle, total of 13120 which comes close to the 13500max gcvw of the bighorn. However we drove 420 miles without any problem. Altough i feel the truck heavy ln gne back the steering is ok and no sway. We have a reese dual cam wd with 800lbs trunion bars and it performed excellent. I am aware we can do better. We have the chain at the third link and i wonder why we have so much difference in axle weight weight from Russ numbers while we have almost similar tt weight and truck. Please help us here. thank you

Flyingsilver,
I think when you weighed with the trailer you had the front trailer axle and the truck rear axle on the same scale platform. You appear to have plenty of weight transfer to the front axle of the truck.
I'd suggest you reweigh using the instructions in Slowmover's post 58 above.

Flyingsilver,
I think when you weighed with the trailer you had the front trailer axle and the truck rear axle on the same scale platform. You appear to have plenty of weight transfer to the front axle of the truck.
I'd suggest you reweigh using the instructions in Slowmover's post 58 above.

Greetings, thank you for your note, indeed we went to another cat scale today on the way to Coalinga CA, about 300p,us miles from Redding, the ride went fine on the flats we did around 19.1mpg on paper, the evic said 19.4, however here are the weight numbers, 3480 steer axle, 3660 drive axle amd trailer 5680, indeed the steer axle seems quite light, will do some changes tomorrow with the link chain on the reese. Maybe a link ip will do it, however it is not s bad but transfering another 200lbs to the front may help. What do you think? thank you , Antonio

I drive around 12-14,000 miles/month lately, mainly Texas Gulf Coast up to West Texas and Oklahoma with oil field loads . . . and what I see consistently is Airstream TT's being pulled nose-down. Not greatly in mainy cases, and not at all confined to old TT's and TV's. Braking performance is the issue, as is TT lateral stability. Only individual tire weight readings -- of both vehicles -- will uncover this.

That best safety practice and best fuel economy coincide in regards mechanical issues of setting up the rig makes the attention to details highly satisfying as to ease of handling, braking and manuverability (a trailer that feels different when changing lanes one way versus the other is enough to send it to the shop on my return; usually, but not always axle alignment).

Tire loads are a big deal, and not just for the heat. As I have been known to post on other forums, fuel economy pays cash money. Confidence in the Texas heat (which didn't really show up until mid-August this year), plus stable performance left and right, will yield best FE from that diesel. I was satisfied with 18-mpg around town with mine until I took on the challenge of bettering it from a Cummns engineer . . and saw 23-mpg in the city limits for an 1100-mile stretch. Mechanical baseline was first, then came the real work of trip-planning and driving skill.

Don't leave anything on the table when it comes to the baseline of numerical values.

(I was deadheading from Ardmore, OK down IH-35 to Corpus Christi on Labor Day weekend Saturday and it was stop-n-go from Willie Nelson's hometown of Abbott all the way to Austin according to northbound drivers . . so I cut across on TX-190 from Belton to Lampasas to use US-281 and thought of several of you Central Texas A/S'ers while on the way. Have't been on that stretch of 190 in maybe twenty years.)

You drove right past my shop then. If you aren't in a hurry, give me a ring next time.

Thanks, I'll put it in the phone. Be good to meet up for a coffee.

And, GENOS now has the '14 Ram EcoDiesel 'Finger Touch' 14mm Oil Drain Valve for the 3L. Everyone -- you and the garage monkey -- will love it. There've been no concerns even with the smash'em/crash'em offroad crowd on the straight six as to integrity. No concerns ever again about stripped pan threads. The Cummins oil pan costs over $400, as a reference.

And, GENOS now has the '14 Ram EcoDiesel 'Finger Touch' 14mm Oil Drain Valve for the 3L. Everyone -- you and the garage monkey -- will love it. There've been no concerns even with the smash'em/crash'em offroad crowd on the straight six as to integrity. No concerns ever again about stripped pan threads. The Cummins oil pan costs over $400, as a reference.

.

Thanks slowmover. I was looking at the Fumoto valve with the nipple. I'm sure that either on would work fine.

Hi Lance,
I am looking at the 2015 ram 1500 like yours. I wanted to get some feedback from you regarding how you like your truck and what kind of gas mileage you get when towing?? I have a 2014 international 23 ' . I drove the truck yesterday and liked everything but the price. Thanks Lorri